No Win No
Fee
There has been much discussion about no win no fee claims
but still the
public do not understand it. The average person with a personal injury
claim will instruct a solicitor to pursue his claim having seen an
advert suggesting that he will receive 100 percent of his compensation
with no costs to pay. This is a ‘venous fly trap’
and it has caught thousands of people to date.
There is no guarantee of receiving 100 percent of your compensation if
you are successful. However, you will not be given this advice by a
solicitor because by suggesting that there is no risk of costs and that
you receive 100 percent of your compensation that is how they manage to
acquire new clients.
The alternative name for no
win no fee is what is known as a conditional
fee agreement or CFA.
You will be asked by your appointed
solicitor to sign a CFA
if after risk assessment he decides to take on
your case.
The CFA was
brought in as the main method of funding personal injury
claims following the abolition of legal aid by the Access to Justice
Act 1999.At that time it was felt that the legal aid system was failing
a lot of person injury claimants who were unable to get legal aid
because they failed the means tested criteria for legal aid. It appears
that only the very poor qualified for legal aid leaving a large
proportion of people who were by no means wealthy to fund their own
claims. In the circumstances only the poor and the very rich
effectively had access to justice.
However, CFA
is not without its share of problems as a funding vehicle
for personal injury claims. Since the withdrawal of legal aid in 2000,
the no win no fee
or CFA has
been the main funding vehicle for personal
injury claims. The basic premise of a CFA is that it is
supported by an
insurance policy known as an ‘After the Event’
(ATE) insurance. The purpose of the insurance is to cover the legal
costs of the unsuccessful claimant which means in most cases paying for
both your own solicitor’s costs and those of the winning side.
This sounds all very well until you dig deeper into what is involved.
For the majority of the public as soon as they hear that their own
costs and the other side’s costs are covered that is enough
information for them. And that is how they are caught out by all the
plethora of misleading adverts promising to cover their legal costs and
give them 100 percent of their claim. This is trap most solicitors want
you to fall in and they have no financial or other motives for telling
you otherwise. In fact they have a vested interest in you remaining
ignorant of the full implications of signing a CFA agreement
because
that is how they get your business in the first place.
The first point to note is that a solicitor will not take on your
personal injury case until he has carried out a ‘risk
assessment’ referred to earlier. The purpose of the risk
assessment is to determine the strength of your claim-in other words
the chances of your success. He must take from you details of the full
facts and circumstances of the accident and details of any supporting
witness or witness evidence. For him to take on your case there must be
at least a 50 percent chance of success otherwise he will not take your
instructions. The solicitors are only interested in cherry picking the
high value claims where the chances of success are greatest.
That is the first clue of the problems ahead and one of the major
shortcomings of the CFA
as a funding vehicle for personal injury cases
because if you fail this first hurdle you are denied access to justice.
Whereas, under legal aid you were denied access to justice on grounds
of your means, under CFA
you are denied access to justice on the basis
of a mini-test known as a risk assessment. It doesn’t matter
how serious your injuries
or what your feelings are about who is at fault, if you fail this
subjective test your case is thrown out before it’s even
begun.
If your are able to surmount this test successfully then you are
invited by the solicitor to sign a no
win no fee or CFA
agreement. It
means that the insurance company underwriting the ‘after the
event’ policy knows that it can collect your premium without
the risk of having to pay out for legal costs under the policy. With
practices such as these no wonder the insurance industry has acquired
the adverse reputation it has. And this should be your next warning of
problems with the CFA-you
are paying premiums against a policy that is
unlikely to pay out.
For a lot of people to acquire such a policy means taking out a loan of
£1000-£1500 or more to cover the premiums. It begs
the question.......
The "Personal Injury Claims Guide
for DIY Claimants".
www.personalinjuryclaimsguide.com
|
"Personal
Injury Claims Guide - Win And Keep 100 Percent of Your Personal Injury
Compensation". personal-injury-claims-guide"Personal Injury Claims
Guide Reveals ...
read
more
How Much Is My Personal Injury Solicitor Worth? By: Matrix Jones The
thought that comes to most peoples’ minds after ...
read more
Estimating the value of a new claim. Author: matrix jones A personal
injury claim is reported every few minutes whether ...
read more
Part 36 Offers - Payment Into Court. If you are involved in civil
litigation with a party and is locked ...
read more
No Win No Fee There has been much discussion about no win no fee claims
but still the public do ...
read more
|
|
|
Disclaimer:
The Publisher has strived to be as accurate and complete as possible in
the creation of this website, notwithstanding the fact that he does not
warrant or represent at any time that the contents within are accurate
due to the rapidly changing nature of the Internet.
This site
is a common sense guide to No Win No Fee. In practical advice websites,
like anything else in life, there are no guarantees of income made.
Readers are cautioned to reply on their own judgment about their
individual circumstances to act accordingly.
This site
is not intended for use as a source of legal, business, accounting or
financial advice. All readers are advised to seek services of competent
professionals in legal, business, accounting, and finance field.
Any
perceived slights of specific people or organizations are unintentional.
|
